A Cyclist Knob with a Camera

> Lifted from uk.rec.cycling.moderated
>
>
> >I found this overtake frightening!!
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXnH8hjjgbw
>
>
> What a prick.
>
> OK he had stopped and put a hand down - but not a foot.
>
> (PS He is an A* knob as he has to have two cameras)

the police car could have altered it's line to give him a bit more room,
looking at the vid the oncoming car was not a issue (too far away) so
the police car could of been over to the middle more, with out slowling
etc. so yes that would of been close and fast.

to be honest if the bike is up for it, I tend to mount the kerb and park
up if I hear a high speed police car. (assuming it's coming my way)
though the bent is unlikely to mangage that.

>The man is a well known knob. He has posted dozens of films on youtube to
>show how hard done by he is. Bit like Doug, but with a camera.

anyone who keeps two videos running the whole time and rides an
"enthusiast" bike like that runs a good chance of being a fanatical
prick.
--
Mike. .. .
Gone beyond the ultimate driving machine.

From: Bernard on 18 May 2010 05:48
"Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message
news:3c8080bc-d0fc-4804-87ad-ceb36d8f65bc(a)m4g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
On 17 May, 18:31, "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:> Roger Thorpe wrote:
> > Mrcheerful wrote:
>
> >> the police driver would have been able to see that the cyclist had
> >> stopped completely (and well short of the centre island, well
> >> done!), which means the cyclist is NOT about to wobble all over the
> >> road or suddenly jump 5 feet to the right, and therefore can be
> >> passed quite closely without any significant danger.
> >> if it was a horse then yes, the police should have passed much more
> >> carefully, but this is an obviously (from the recumbent) experienced
> >> (probably adult) cyclist that has completely stopped.
>
> > If we assume that it were safe would it still be good manners to give
> > someone who expects not to be seen this kind of fright?
>
> Why was it a fright? He must have heard the sirens.
>Because he is not protected by a metal box and is therefore a
vulnerable road user but is not treated as such.

This was not a normal situation, it was an emergency which he realised
because he stopped. If he was worried because he felt vulnerable, he should
have got off the road.

From: GT on 18 May 2010 09:51
"Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message
news:3c8080bc-d0fc-4804-87ad-ceb36d8f65bc(a)m4g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
On 17 May, 18:31, "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)no-spam-
blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:> Roger Thorpe wrote:
> > Mrcheerful wrote:
>> >> the police driver would have been able to see that the cyclist had
>> >> stopped completely (and well short of the centre island, well
>> >> done!), which means the cyclist is NOT about to wobble all over the
>> >> road or suddenly jump 5 feet to the right, and therefore can be
>> >> passed quite closely without any significant danger.
>> >> if it was a horse then yes, the police should have passed much more
>> >> carefully, but this is an obviously (from the recumbent) experienced
>> >> (probably adult) cyclist that has completely stopped.
>>
>> > If we assume that it were safe would it still be good manners to give
>> > someone who expects not to be seen this kind of fright?
>>
>> Why was it a fright? He must have heard the sirens.
>>
>Because he is not protected by a metal box and is therefore a
>vulnerable road user but is not treated as such.

The police driver will have seen the adult pull over and stop as the sirens
moved closer. He left an 18-inch gap between his car and the stationary
vehicle as he knew that the cyclist was aware of the car's presense. If the
cyclist had not been aware of the police car, then the driver would have
left a much larger gap.

>> The man is a well known knob. He has posted dozens of films on youtube to
>> show how hard done by he is. Bit like Doug, but with a camera.
>>
>Seems like a good idea to video examples of bad driving and dangerous
>situations instead of trying to brush it all under the carpet. As I
>have cameras I might decide to start doing it, particularly drivers
>going through red lights and driving on pavements.
>

Good idea, then most cyclists would be banned - I rarely see a cyclist stop
for a red light!! I have never seen a car go throught a red light or drive
on the pavement.

The cyclist in the video has a number of clips posted on youtube. I have
just watched a few and it seems that he likes to ride along about 1m out
from the kerb which is fine. Problem is that he deliberately makes it hard
for people to overtake him, so when they do he suddenly drifts out a metre
or two apparently without looking or signalling. This clearly dangerous
behaviour is carefully timed to occur just as the cars go past, which
enables him to put on a frightened "waa" sound on film and then shout at
them at the next set of lights. He then carefully positions his bike in the
middle of the lane in front of all the cars who are patiently waiting their
turn at the lights and then sets off slowly, so as to ensnare his next
victim. He doesn't use the cycle lanes. He is clearly try to infuriate the
car drivers who *are* able to maintain an appropriate speed for the road. In
order to drive a car a driver must pass a test to prove their knowledge of
the highway code, a document stating that vehicles unable to maintain a
suitable speed for the road should pull over to let faster vehicles pass and
avoid frustration!

From: Doug on 18 May 2010 12:46
On 18 May, 10:48, "Bernard" <bernard.x.rams...(a)btinterent.x.com>
wrote:> "Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message
>
> news:3c8080bc-d0fc-4804-87ad-ceb36d8f65bc(a)m4g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
> On 17 May, 18:31, "The Medway Handyman" <davidl...(a)no-spam-
>
> blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> > Roger Thorpe wrote:
> > > Mrcheerful wrote:
>
> > >> the police driver would have been able to see that the cyclist had
> > >> stopped completely (and well short of the centre island, well
> > >> done!), which means the cyclist is NOT about to wobble all over the
> > >> road or suddenly jump 5 feet to the right, and therefore can be
> > >> passed quite closely without any significant danger.
> > >> if it was a horse then yes, the police should have passed much more
> > >> carefully, but this is an obviously (from the recumbent) experienced
> > >> (probably adult) cyclist that has completely stopped.
>
> > > If we assume that it were safe would it still be good manners to give
> > > someone who expects not to be seen this kind of fright?
>
> > Why was it a fright? He must have heard the sirens.
>
> Because he is not protected by a metal box and is therefore a
> vulnerable road user but is not treated as such.
>
> This was not a normal situation, it was an emergency which he realised
> because he stopped. If he was worried because he felt vulnerable, he should
> have got off the road.
>But we know by now that the pavements are not much safer from crashing
cars, which can also knock holes in walls. Difficult to know where is
safe from these pampered killers.

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.